XML 32 R26.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v2.4.0.8

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Sep. 30, 2013
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES | COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Commitments The Utility estimates total Utility capital expenditures for fiscal 2014 at approximately $175 million. In fiscal 2011, the Utility initiated a multi-year project to replace its existing customer relationship and work management, financial, and supply chain software applications to enhance its technology, customer service, and business processes. At September 30, 2013, the Company was contractually committed to costs of approximately $1.5 million related to this project. Fiscal year 2014 capital expenditures for non-regulated subsidiaries will depend on the nature and magnitude of investments with the current estimate at $10 million. There are no material contractual commitments at September 30, 2013 related to these estimated capital expenditures. The Utility and LER have entered into various contracts, expiring on dates through 2019, for the storage, transportation, and supply of natural gas. Minimum payments required under the contracts in place at September 30, 2013 are estimated at approximately $981 million. The Utility recovers its costs from customers in accordance with the PGA Clause. Leases and Guarantees The lease agreement covering the main office space of the Utility extends through February 2015 with the option to renew for five additional years. The aggregate rental expense for fiscal years 2013, 2012, and 2011 was approximately $1.0 million, $0.9 million, and $0.9 million, respectively. The annual minimum rental payment for fiscal year 2014 is anticipated to be approximately $1.0 million through fiscal year 2015. The annual rental amount for the lease agreement covering MGE's main office space is approximately $0.6 million, and the lease term extends through November 30, 2015. The Utility has entered into various operating lease agreements for the rental of vehicles and power operated equipment. The rental costs will be approximately $2.7 million in fiscal year 2014, $1.8 million in fiscal year 2015, $1.0 million in fiscal year 2016, and $0.4 million in fiscal year 2017, and $0.1 million in fiscal year 2018. The Utility and LER have other relatively minor rental arrangements that provide for minimum rental payments. A consolidated subsidiary is a general partner in an unconsolidated partnership that invests in real estate partnerships. The subsidiary and third parties are jointly and severally liable for the payment of mortgage loans in the aggregate outstanding amount of approximately $1.6 million incurred in connection with various real estate ventures. Laclede Group has no reason to believe that the other principal liable parties will not be able to meet their proportionate share of these obligations. Laclede Group further believes that the asset values of the real estate properties are sufficient to support these mortgage loans. Contingencies The Utility owns and operates natural gas distribution, transmission, and storage facilities, the operations of which are subject to various environmental laws, regulations, and interpretations. While environmental issues resulting from such operations arise in the ordinary course of business, such issues have not materially affected the Company’s or the Utility's financial position and results of operations. As environmental laws, regulations, and their interpretations change, however, the Utility may be required to incur additional costs. Similar to other natural gas utility companies, Laclede Gas Company faces the risk of incurring environmental liabilities. In the natural gas industry, these are typically associated with sites formerly owned or operated by gas distribution companies like Laclede Gas and MGE or its predecessor companies at which manufactured gas operations took place. At this time, Laclede Gas has identified three former manufactured gas plant (MGP) sites where costs have been incurred and claims have been asserted: one in Shrewsbury, Missouri and two in the City of St. Louis, Missouri. Laclede Gas has enrolled the two sites in the City of St. Louis in the Missouri Department of Natural Resources Brownfields/Voluntary Cleanup Program (BVCP). MGE has enrolled all of its owned former manufactured gas plant sites in the BVCP. With regard to the former MGP site located in Shrewsbury, Missouri, Laclede Gas and state and federal environmental regulators agreed upon certain remedial actions to a portion of the site in a 1999 Administrative Order on Consent (AOC), which actions have been completed. On September 22, 2008, EPA Region VII issued a letter of Termination and Satisfaction terminating the AOC. However, if after this termination of the AOC, regulators require additional remedial actions, or additional claims are asserted, Laclede Gas may incur additional costs. One of the sites located in the City of St. Louis is currently owned by a development agency of the City, which, together with other City development agencies, has selected a developer to redevelop the site. In conjunction with this redevelopment effort, Laclede Gas and another former owner of the site entered into an agreement (Remediation Agreement) with the City development agencies, the developer, and an environmental consultant that obligates one of the City agencies and the environmental consultant to remediate the site and obtain a No Further Action letter from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources. The Remediation Agreement also provides for a release of Laclede Gas and the other former site owner from certain liabilities related to the past and current environmental condition of the site and requires the developer and the environmental consultant to maintain certain insurance coverages, including remediation cost containment, premises pollution liability, and professional liability. The operative provisions of the Remediation Agreement were triggered on December 20, 2010, on which date Laclede Gas and the other former site owner, as full consideration under the Remediation Agreement, paid a small percentage of the cost of remediation of the site. The amount paid by Laclede Gas did not materially impact the financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows of the Company. Laclede Gas has not owned the other site located in the City of St. Louis for many years. In a letter dated June 29, 2011, the Attorney General for the State of Missouri informed Laclede Gas that the Missouri Department of Natural Resources had completed an investigation of the site. The Attorney General requested that Laclede Gas participate in the follow up investigations of the site. In a letter dated January 10, 2012, Laclede Gas stated that it would participate in future environmental response activities at the site in conjunction with other potentially responsible parties that are willing to contribute to such efforts in a meaningful and equitable fashion. To date, amounts required for remediation at these sites have not been material. However, the amount of costs relative to future remedial actions at these and other sites is unknown and may be material. Laclede Gas has notified its insurers that it seeks reimbursement for costs incurred in the past and future potential liabilities associated with the MGP sites. While some of the insurers have denied coverage and reserved their rights, Laclede Gas continues to discuss potential reimbursements with them. In 2005, the Utility’s outside consultant completed an analysis of the MGP sites to determine cost estimates for a one-time contractual transfer of risk from each of the Utility’s insurers of environmental coverage for the MGP sites. That analysis demonstrated a range of possible future expenditures to investigate, monitor, and remediate these MGP sites from $5.8 million to $36.3 million based upon then currently available facts, technology, and laws and regulations. The actual costs that Laclede Gas may incur could be materially higher or lower depending upon several factors, including whether remedial actions will be required, final selection and regulatory approval of any remedial actions, changing technologies and governmental regulations, the ultimate ability of other potentially responsible parties to pay, the successful completion of remediation efforts required by the Remediation Agreement described above, and any insurance recoveries. MGE has seven owned MGP sites enrolled in the BVCP, including Joplin MGP #1, St. Joseph MGP #1, Kansas City Coal Gas Station B, Kansas City Station A Railroad, Kansas City Coal Gas Station A North, Kansas City Coal Gas Station A South, and Independence MGP #2. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources awarded a Certificate of Completion to Missouri Gas Energy in 2001 for a site located at 20th and Indiana in Kansas City after an initial site analysis and the property was subsequently sold. Source removal has been conducted at all of the owned sites since 2003 with the exception of Joplin, which is in the early stages of site analysis and characterization. Remediation efforts at these sites are at various stages of completion, ranging from groundwater monitoring and sampling following source removal activities to early site characterization in Joplin. As part of its participation in the BVCP, MGE communicates regularly with the Missouri Department of Natural Resources with respect to its remediation efforts and monitoring activities at these sites. Costs associated with environmental remediation activities are accrued when such costs are probable and reasonably estimable. The Utility anticipates that any costs it may incur in the future to remediate these sites, less any amounts received as insurance proceeds or as contributions from other potentially responsible parties, would be deferred and recovered in rates through periodic adjustments approved by the MoPSC. Accordingly, any potential liabilities that may arise associated with remediating these sites are not expected to have a material impact on the future financial position and results of operations of the Utility or the Company. The MoPSC Staff proposed disallowances related to Laclede Gas' recovery of its gas costs totaling $6.0 million pertaining to Laclede Gas' purchase of gas from a marketing affiliate, LER, applicable to fiscal years 2005 through 2007. The MoPSC staff also proposed a number of non-monetary recommendations, based on its review of gas costs for fiscal years 2008 through 2011. In a related matter, on October 6, 2010, the MoPSC Staff filed a complaint against Laclede Gas alleging that Laclede Gas' affiliate transactions and its Cost Allocation Manual (CAM) violated the MoPSC's affiliate transaction rules. Laclede Gas responded with a counterclaim that the MoPSC Staff had failed to adhere to the affiliate transaction rules and the Company's CAM. On July 16, 2013, Laclede Gas, the MoPSC Staff and the Office of the Public Counsel requested MoPSC approval of a unanimous stipulation and agreement resolving the affiliate transaction matters for fiscal years 2005 through 2011, resolving the October 6, 2010 complaint, resolving Laclede Gas' counterclaim, presenting a revised CAM for MoPSC approval, and establishing standards of conduct for gas purchases and sales. While the PSC Staff's disallowances were withdrawn as part of the stipulation, Laclede Gas agreed to a minor adjustment to the off-system sales and capacity release sharing mechanism. For a three-year period ending September 30, 2016, Laclede Gas' share of the first $2 million in net margin is reduced from 15% to 0%. None of the other sharing percentages are affected, and beginning October 1, 2016, Laclede's sharing percentage of the first $2 million in net margins returns to 15%. The Stipulation and agreement was approved by the MoPSC in an order issued on August 14, 2013. On July 7, 2010, the MoPSC Staff filed a complaint against Laclede Gas alleging that, by stating that it was not in possession of proprietary LER documents, Laclede Gas violated the MoPSC Order authorizing the holding company structure (2001 Order). Laclede Gas counterclaimed stating the Staff failed to adhere to pricing provisions of the MoPSC's affiliate transaction rules and Laclede Gas' Cost Allocation Manual. By orders dated November 3, 2010 and February 4, 2011, respectively, the MoPSC dismissed Laclede's counterclaim and granted summary judgment to Staff, finding that Laclede Gas violated the terms of the 2001 Order and authorizing its General Counsel to seek penalties in court against Laclede Gas. On May 19, 2011, the MoPSC's General Counsel filed a petition seeking penalties against Laclede Gas for violation of the 2001 Order. The MoPSC and Laclede Gas agreed to hold the penalty case in abeyance pending the outcome of Laclede's appeal of the November 3, 2010 and February 4, 2011 orders. These Orders were reversed by the Cole County Circuit Court, but later upheld by the Western District Court of Appeals. On March 19, 2013, the Missouri Supreme Court declined Laclede Gas' request to review the opinion of the Western District Court of Appeals. As a result, Laclede Gas produced certain LER documentation that had been requested by the MoPSC Staff and, pursuant to agreement between the MoPSC and Laclede Gas, the MoPSC’s May 2011 penalty case was dismissed. On June 29, 2010, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) issued a Notice of Violations to Laclede Gas alleging lapses in certain employment selection procedures during a two-year period ending in February 2006. On July 2, 2013, Laclede Gas executed a Conciliation Agreement with the OFCCP in which the Company did not admit to liability, but agreed to provide make whole relief of back pay and interest to the impacted individuals from 2004-2006. The Company's agreement to provide make whole relief will not have a material effect on the consolidated financial position and results of operations, or cash flows of the Company. As discussed in Note 11, Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, Laclede Gas and LER enter into NYMEX and ICE exchange-traded/cleared derivative instruments. Previously, these instruments were held in accounts at MF Global, Inc. On October 31, 2011, affiliated entities of MF Global filed a Chapter 11 petition at the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of New York. Subsequently, the court-appointed bankruptcy trustee transferred all of the open positions and a significant portion of the margin deposits of Laclede Gas and LER to a new brokerage firm. On June 27, 2013, the bankruptcy Trustee issued a statement projecting that MF Global customers would receive a full payout of their claims. As of November 26, 2013, Laclede Gas and LER had $0.2 million and $0.1 million, respectively, on deposit with MF Global that remain unavailable pending final resolution by the bankruptcy trustee. As the Company has recovered 98% of the amount at issue in the MF Global bankruptcy, the total remaining exposure is not considered material. On February 19, 2013, Heartland Midwest, LLC, a contractor for Time Warner Cable, hit a MGE natural gas line causing a gas leak while directionally boring during underground cable installation. The natural gas leak resulted in an explosion and fire which killed one person, injured approximately seventeen (including three MGE employees who were at the scene), caused major damage to JJ's restaurant, and caused property damage to adjacent buildings. Several lawsuits have been filed in state court in Jackson County, Missouri, alleging wrongful death, personal injury, property damage, and business interruption. The lawsuits are in the early stages of discovery. While the Company's total exposure is not considered material at this time, management plans to vigorously defend the matter and will continue to evaluate its exposure as discovery proceeds. Management believes, after discussion with counsel, that the final outcome of this matter will not have a material effect on the consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows of the Company. Laclede Group is involved in other litigation, claims, and investigations arising in the normal course of business. Management, after discussion with counsel, believes that the final outcome will not have a material effect on the consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows of the Company.

X
- Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 210 -SubTopic 10 -Section S99 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (SX 210.5-02.25) -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6877327&loc=d3e13212-122682 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 825 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6449706&loc=d3e16207-108621 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 460 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 8 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6398077&loc=d3e12565-110249 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -SubTopic 20 -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=25496072&loc=d3e14435-108349 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Section 50 -Paragraph 2 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6394976&loc=d3e25287-109308 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration